On March 12, 2024, the Ninth Circuit published a decision in Ortiz v. Randstad Inhouse Services, LLC, holding that the Plaintiff Adan Ortiz (“Plaintiff”) qualified as a “transportation worker” under the Federal Arbitration Act, and was thus exempted from mandatory arbitration under the FAA. The district court rejected the employer’s arguments that Plaintiff was bound by the arbitration mandate under the FAA because he performed duties on a purely local basis. This case continues to establish that the scope of the “transportation worker” exemption under the FAA is broader than only those workers that physically move goods or people across state lines, such as truck drivers and cargo pilots.
About
Kayla Malone is an associate in the Labor and Employment Practice Group in the firm's San Francisco office.
Latest Post
More Posts
Federal Judge’s Decision Deals Serious Blow to NLRB’s Joint Employer Rule and Continued Efforts to Expand Who Constitutes an Employer Under the NLRA
Who’s a Joint Employer Now? New NLRB Rule Drastically Expands Joint Employer Definition
California Supreme Court Clarifies PAGA Standing When “Individual PAGA Claims” Have Been Compelled to Arbitration
About
Kayla Malone is an associate in the Labor and Employment Practice Group in the firm's San Francisco office.